RFK Jr. The Defender - Fed Immunity for Banksters with John Titus

John Titus is a writer and filmmaker who has spent the past 25 years writing about the systemic fraud that drove the global financial crisis and ended up rewarding the perpetrators with bailouts while putting millions of Americans on the street by ripping them off on their mortgages. In this episode, John tells the story of how the U.S. government and a cartel of foreign banks negotiated a deal that allowed them to remain immune from criminal prosecution no matter how egregious their crimes were. John explains how the deal was struck between the government and the cartel, and how it allowed the banks to continue to enrich themselves even though they were breaking the law and defrauding the American people. John's work has been featured in the New York Times, NPR, and the Wall Street Journal, and he is a frequent contributor to the Financial Times and the BBC. John is also the co-host of the podcast Money and Markets and produces a weekly video podcast for Solari called "Money and Markets" with his partner, Catherine Austin Fitz. John has a Bachelor's and Master's degree in electrical engineering and a Master s degree in Electrical Engineering, and is licensed by the Supreme Court in the United States and is a Master's Degree in the US Supreme Court and many lower courts. He has worked extensively over the past 10 years as a lawyer and has made films and videos about the financial and monetary events that have undermined the rule of law in this country for the past ten years. This is the way the banks are ripping us off, and they never get prosecuted. This has been happening for more than 10 years, and this has been going on for 10 years. This is not only because the banks get away with it, and we don t get prosecuted even though we know they are doing it? And they get to keep their crimes and we get to do it, but we don't do it. Why not prosecute them? Why don t they get it? Why don't they get a slap on the wrist and they don't get a chance to go to jail? Why not do something about it? And why do they get off the hook? John Titus explains why they don t even get a fair chance to do what they deserve to do their fair share of justice in this case? and why they should get their due to the deal they've been promised by the US government and why it s going to get their day in court? And why they can t do anything about it in this episode.

00:00:00.000 Hey everybody, my guest today is John Titus.

00:00:03.000 John has written extensively, made films and videos about the financial and monetary events that undercut the rule of law in this country over the past 10 years.

00:00:15.000 By the way, this has been happening for longer than 10 years, but he's been writing about it for 10 years.

00:00:20.000 This is the way the banks are ripping us off, and they never get prosecuted, and that's what we're going to talk about.

00:00:26.000 But John has practiced mainly patent law over the past 25 years.

00:00:31.000 He holds bachelor's and master's degrees in electrical engineering, and he is licensed by the U.S. Supreme Court and many lower courts.

00:00:41.000 He temporarily left his legal practice in 2012 to write about and to create a documentary about the official response by the US government to this systemic fraud that drove the global financial crisis and ended up rewarding the perpetrators with bailouts while putting millions of Americans on the street by ripping them off on their mortgages.

00:01:07.000 John Titus currently produces a weekly video podcast for Solari.

00:01:13.000 Many of you know Catherine Austin Fitz, who is his partner.

00:01:16.000 His video is called Money and Markets, and you can find him on his YouTube channel, Best Evidence.

00:01:24.000 You know, I read a really devastating piece that you did on the HBC case.

00:01:32.000 I just wanted to talk to you about that.

00:01:35.000 And what you uncovered is that there's a secret agreement Between the United States government and a cartel of foreign banks that basically provides immunity to banks, no matter how egregious their criminal behavior, they can't get prosecuted in this country criminally.

00:01:57.000 Particularly with the HPC bank, HPC confessed to criminal conduct Worth billions of dollars of theft.

00:02:09.000 And that should have put the entire upper staff in prison and had some kind of criminal sanctions against the bank.

00:02:18.000 And in the middle of that prosecution, the DOJ, Department of Justice, was going forward full bore and said, we got these guys.

00:02:26.000 They've confessed everything.

00:02:27.000 We just have to basically tell the judge how long they need to go to prison for.

00:02:32.000 And in the middle of that, they began getting these very odd interventions that you were able to parse this kind of coded language that was being used between British and American officials and tell the story for the first time.

00:02:47.000 Yeah, well, to set the table, HSBC openly admitted and freely confessed to violating, criminally violating the Bank Secrecy Act and the Trading with the Enemy Act because they were facilitating money laundering by drug dealers and terrorists.

00:03:02.000 And they admitted to all this.

00:03:04.000 And so the DOJ had, the Department of Justice in the US had these guys dead to rights.

00:03:10.000 And there were people in the DOJ in Washington who were like, let's go get these guys.

00:03:16.000 And what happened is, that was in the summer of 2012, but by the end of 2012, in December, Eric Holder, who was the Attorney General at the time, gets up and says, now we're going to fine him $1.9 billion, but we're not going to put anybody in jail.

00:03:33.000 And the New York Times led with a piece that said, today is a dark day for the rule of law.

00:03:37.000 And nobody really knew what had happened.

00:03:40.000 As of that time, late 2012.

00:03:43.000 And then what happens if you flash forward about four years?

00:03:46.000 The House Financial Services Committee looks into the HSBC case.

00:03:50.000 Now, what they find is that, yes, the prosecutors in the DOJ were going to prosecute HSBC. They were going to put individual bankers in prison.

00:03:59.000 Let me interrupt you for a second, John, just to set the stage so people understand.

00:04:07.000 There were people in the Senate like Elizabeth Warren and others who were saying, why the hell did not HSBC go to jail?

00:04:16.000 And they were investigating our Justice Department and trying to figure out what happened.

00:04:21.000 Right.

00:04:22.000 They were asking...

00:04:23.000 Asking questions.

00:04:24.000 And finally, the House Financial Services Committee did this report, did this investigation of the DOJ. And the key document in that investigation was a letter sent from George Osborne, who was the head of the Exchequer in the UK. He was basically their Treasury Secretary.

00:04:43.000 And he sent a letter in the summer of 2012 as the prosecution is gearing up.

00:04:48.000 And he sent the letter to Tim Geithner, who is the Treasury Secretary of the U.S., And Ben Bernanke, who was the Fed Chairman.

00:04:55.000 And he said, hey, you can't prosecute HSBC. And he has this weird language in there saying, well, it's a systemically important financial institution.

00:05:05.000 And if you prosecute HSBC, we're going to face contagion and it's going to roil all these markets, so don't do it.

00:05:12.000 And lo and behold, from that moment forward, the DOJ begins to walk back its plans to prosecute HSBC to the point where by December of 2012, they basically gave HSBC a pass.

00:05:25.000 And not only that, but they implemented all these changes to the Deferred Prosecution Agreement with HSBC that HSBC suggested.

00:05:34.000 And so it was like, well, who is George Osborne?

00:05:38.000 Why are U.S. authorities listening to him?

00:05:41.000 And why is the Justice Department listening to Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner?

00:05:46.000 What's up here?

00:05:47.000 And that's really what that documentary I did was about.

00:05:49.000 It's called All the Planner He's Man.

00:05:51.000 The question is, how did a British official intervene in a U.S. criminal case?

00:05:59.000 How does he even know about it?

00:06:01.000 Let's start with how does he know about it?

00:06:03.000 What is the Treasury doing intervening in a criminal case?

00:06:10.000 How do they know about it?

00:06:12.000 How does George Osborne know about it?

00:06:14.000 So what's going on during the prosecution or during the plan to prosecute HSBC in the DOJ is there's a group from Britain called the Financial Services Authority that's sitting inside of internal DOJ meetings.

00:06:28.000 It's like, well, what's going on there?

00:06:31.000 And it turns out that there's a group in the Bank for International Settlements called the Financial Stability Board, the FSB. And the FSB was created in the wake of the global financial crisis.

00:06:42.000 What is the Bank for International Settlements?

00:06:44.000 Some people know.

00:06:45.000 Just very quickly, high-level Bank for International Settlements is sort of the umbrella organizing bank that organizes central banks around the world.

00:06:55.000 So the Fed is...

00:06:57.000 Each country has its own Fed, essentially.

00:07:00.000 Yes, yes.

00:07:01.000 And this is the umbrella trade association, essentially, for all the Feds.

00:07:07.000 Yes, that's exactly what the BIS is.

00:07:11.000 And it's headquartered in Basel, Switzerland.

00:07:13.000 And about four to eight times a year, the local feds from the US, from UK, everywhere, they all get together in Basel and they talk about financial issues and monetary issues in the BIS. But after the global financial crisis, the BIS sets up a group, kind of a working group called the Financial Stability Board, and tasks it with monitoring financial stability and systemic risk.

00:07:38.000 And what they really did there was they created a list of 25 systemically important financial institutions that basically put those institutions, they were special rules for these institutions.

00:07:51.000 They published this list, suddenly, of systemically important financial institutions, and they're some of the top banks in the world.

00:08:02.000 Nobody really knew when they published them, what's the implications of that?

00:08:07.000 It was almost like just an honor roll that they published.

00:08:10.000 Nobody really understood that this was a term of art.

00:08:16.000 That was intended.

00:08:18.000 If you were on that list, it means you cannot be criminally prosecuted for anything anywhere in the world, essentially.

00:08:25.000 It meant you were a made man.

00:08:26.000 Yeah, that's what it meant.

00:08:28.000 But practically what it meant is the FSB had all these working groups and one was like the Organization for Cooperation.

00:08:36.000 They had all these sort of Orwellian sounding names.

00:08:39.000 And what they did under the umbrella of financial stability is they said, you know, to monitor financial stability, we need to dispatch these different committees and working groups around the world to these different central banks and different jurisdictions like the U.S. to monitor what's going on With our 25 SIFIs, the Systemically Important Financial Institutions.

00:09:01.000 And because HSBC is on that list, this group, the Financial Services Authority from the UK, which is in charge of monitoring UK banks like HSBC, That FSA group from the UK gets inside of Department of Justice meetings and is monitoring actively those meetings and reporting back to Basel,

00:09:26.000 Switzerland and reporting back to the Financial Stability Board so people can keep tabs of what's going on.

00:09:32.000 And that's how George Osborne knew that prosecutors in the DOJ were teeing up HSBC for prosecutions and they were serious.

00:09:42.000 And that's with George Osborne.

00:09:44.000 Another thing to understand about the FSB is membership in the FSB went to basically three members of the government, of each government.

00:09:53.000 So in the US it was the head of the Fed, it was the Treasury Secretary, and it was the head of the SEC. In the UK it was the head of the Bank of England.

00:10:02.000 The head of, I think, the Financial Services Authority, and the head of the exchequer, which is George Osborne.

00:10:09.000 So those people are automatically members.

00:10:11.000 And that's how George Osborne caught wind of what was going on in the U.S. And he said to these guys, Geithner and Bernanke, basically, hey, that's a U.K. bank.

00:10:21.000 Back off.

00:10:22.000 Don't prosecute them.

00:10:23.000 And they listened.

00:10:24.000 One of the things that you point out is that there was another UK bank, the Standard Chartered Bank, that is, I think it's almost as big as SBC, but they had been involved in a lot of the same kind of shenanigans, and they did get prosecuted because they're not on the SIFI list, the made man list.

00:10:44.000 It was the Standard Charter at that time.

00:10:47.000 Now, today, Standard Charter is on the list.

00:10:49.000 But as of this time, which is 2011-2012, Standard Charter was on that list.

00:10:54.000 And consequently, there was nobody from Standard...

00:11:03.000 DOJ meetings from the UK. It was only HSBC and that's a direct consequence of the fact that HSBC was at that time a SIFI and Standard Chartered wasn't.

00:11:14.000 So Standard Chartered was they had no monitor in their meetings and nobody knew what was going on.

00:11:19.000 Now, as it turned out, they didn't get prosecuted anyway because they later became a SIFI. And one of the things that the dots that you didn't connect in this piece, but I'm assuming And correct me if I'm wrong, that these banks that get on the SIFI list are the banks that probably received bailouts in 2008, the Western governments, right?

00:11:43.000 So the Western governments are protecting their investments in these crooks.

00:11:51.000 Yep, basically.

00:11:52.000 That's correct.

00:11:52.000 The biggest banks got the biggest bailouts, and that's just how it went.

00:11:56.000 However, there were banks in the U.S. that did receive bailouts that are not considered SIFIs or were not at that time.

00:12:03.000 The leading example that I could think of was probably Wells Fargo.

00:12:07.000 But the ones that are the international banks and the ones that really have the international monetary power, which is really, you know, the Goldman Sachs, the JP Morgans, the Citigroups, they're on that list.

00:12:20.000 And that list grew from 25 in 2011.

00:12:23.000 But you're exactly right, they all got bailed out.

00:12:25.000 But the bailout just expanded.

00:12:27.000 It went from too big to fail, so we're going to give you a bailout, to too big to jail.

00:12:32.000 And that's really what this is all about.

00:12:35.000 And one of the things that you talk about in your piece is this very kind of obscure Orwellian language that which, you know, what's the guy's name again?

00:12:49.000 George?

00:12:50.000 George Osborne, the head of the Exchequer.

00:12:53.000 One of the things that you point out that's very interesting in your piece is this very sort of obscure and Orwellian language that George Osborne, who's the British FSA chief, he's sending to his counterparts in the Justice Department telling them to back off.

00:13:14.000 If you're a layman reading it, he's saying, oh, of course, I don't mean to interfere with the Justice Department, but he's using these coded languages, which they all understand, but the average layman wouldn't, which says, you're welcome to To enforce the rules, but he's talking about a different set of rules within your own jurisdiction.

00:13:39.000 And he's talking about a different meaning of the word jurisdiction.

00:13:42.000 And it's very clear to all of them what he's saying.

00:13:45.000 And then at the end, he does this kind of pose, this posturing that I don't mean to interfere, but that's exactly what he's doing.

00:13:53.000 He's telling the Justice Department what it cannot do.

00:13:56.000 Yeah, it's totally coded language.

00:13:58.000 The big tell for me that there was something way off in a couple of those paragraphs was he says, you know, it's my job to enforce global rules and standards.

00:14:11.000 It's like, wait a minute.

00:14:12.000 You're writing on British letterhead.

00:14:14.000 You're writing on letterhead that says HMS on it.

00:14:17.000 You know, Her Majesty's Service.

00:14:19.000 You're writing on Crown letterhead that's paid for by British taxpayers.

00:14:23.000 Your job is not to enforce global rules, Guy.

00:14:26.000 Your job is to enforce British rules.

00:14:28.000 What are you talking about, global rules?

00:14:30.000 What do you mean?

00:14:32.000 And that red flag is sort of a giveaway that he's telling them something very important.

00:14:39.000 Basically to enforce global rules.

00:14:41.000 And then he goes on with this whole spiel about jurisdiction.

00:14:43.000 And it's like, well, wait a minute.

00:14:45.000 Why wouldn't you just say, you know, your job is to enforce law in the U.S. and my job is to enforce law in the U.K.? He doesn't say that.

00:14:54.000 He says it's your job is to enforce global rules within your jurisdiction.

00:14:58.000 And it's like, well, why would you use a longer phrase within your jurisdiction rather than the shorter phrase?

00:15:05.000 Obviously, the longer phrase means something other than within the U.S., or you just sort of said within the U.S. I mean, that jurisdiction, you know, as a lawyer, it's a term of art, and it can mean a lot of different things.

00:15:18.000 And what he means there is, you know, he sort of defines it later on, where he's saying jurisdiction means I'm from the U.K. I oversee U.K. banks.

00:15:27.000 You're from the U.S., you are a C.U.S. banks.

00:15:31.000 HSBC ain't a U.S. bank.

00:15:33.000 Back off.

00:15:34.000 This is up to us.

00:15:36.000 And what I'm telling you, I, George Osborne, am telling you, is you need to enforce global rules.

00:15:41.000 And they know exactly what he means because he says you need to enforce global rules with respect to systemically important financial institutions.

00:15:50.000 And then it's like, ding, the only organization in the world at that point that's using that language is the Financial Stability Board in the Bank for International Settlements.

00:16:00.000 In other words, George Osborne is writing on British letterhead, but he's using language that's coming not from any sort of UK authorities.

00:16:08.000 He's using language that's originating We're good to go.

00:16:27.000 George Osborne is a cabinet-level official in the UK. The guy he's in parity with and should be concerned with isn't Ben Bernanke and Tim Geithner.

00:16:36.000 It really should be Eric Holder, but he doesn't even write to Holder.

00:16:38.000 He goes straight to these guys.

00:16:40.000 Why is that?

00:16:41.000 Because Eric Holder is not a member of the Financial Stability Board.

00:16:45.000 Bernanke and Geithner are.

00:16:46.000 That's why he's writing to them.

00:16:49.000 Yeah, so what we have is a cartel of federal banks who has declared that they are above the law and that they can commit criminal acts, including money laundering for terrorists, money laundering for drug dealers, and that they cannot be criminally prosecuted for that.

00:17:09.000 And as you point out, Way back at the beginning, they put aside kind of a penalty fund, which is really just a licensing fee.

00:17:18.000 They told the Justice Department how much the Justice Department could fine them.

00:17:23.000 Yeah, they did.

00:17:24.000 It was money they had put aside even before they got caught.

00:17:27.000 And it's just a de facto licensing fee to launder money for terrorists and drug dealers.

00:17:35.000 And if you do get caught, you pay your licensing fee.

00:17:39.000 That's it.

00:17:39.000 You got it.

00:17:40.000 There was actually a guy in Brooklyn who worked for HSBC named John Cruz, who was watching all this as a bank vice president go on in real time.

00:17:50.000 And he was raising cane about it, but getting nowhere.

00:17:53.000 And he did an interview and he said, these guys, they put that $1.9 billion?

00:17:56.000 They had that sitting in account ready to go before that fine was ever levied.

00:18:00.000 But you're exactly right.

00:18:01.000 That fine was dictated from HSBC to the DOJ, period.

00:18:07.000 Let me ask you this, because this is something that you don't touch on, but it's a very disturbing thought.

00:18:16.000 What would have happened if Eric Holder had said to the Treasury Department to Bernicke and Geithner, I don't care.

00:18:26.000 These guys committed criminal acts in our country.

00:18:29.000 They are facilitating terrorism. 0.80

00:18:32.000 They're facilitating drugs in our country, dangerous drugs.

00:18:36.000 We're trying to put an end to that.

00:18:38.000 We're going to criminally prosecute them.

00:18:40.000 What is the sanction?

00:18:42.000 What is the power that this international cartel has at that point?

00:18:48.000 You know, what happens?

00:18:50.000 What's the consequence if you don't play ball?

00:18:53.000 Presumably, you're going to get ruined one way or the other.

00:18:57.000 And you have to remember, if you're dealing with powers that have criminal immunity, all bets are off.

00:19:03.000 Anything can happen to you, because regardless of what the penalty is, they can just take you out.

00:19:08.000 They can murder you. 0.99

00:19:09.000 They can kill you.

00:19:10.000 And you can't be prosecuted because you're above the law.

00:19:13.000 I mean, that's the ugly truth of it.

00:19:15.000 I mean, I hesitate to speculate about that because that didn't happen.

00:19:19.000 And the fact is, these guys are smart and they hedge their bets.

00:19:22.000 Eric Holder being at the head of the DOJ, along with Lanny Brewer, that was no accident.

00:19:26.000 Those guys came from a law firm in Washington, D.C. called Covington& Burling.

00:19:31.000 Covington& Burling represents all of the two paid-to-fail banks, all of them.

00:19:36.000 And so by putting those white-collar criminal defense guys at the head of the Dutch Department, I mean, everybody knew in advance what the outcome of those cases was going to be.

00:19:46.000 There was going to be no prosecution.

00:19:48.000 So that deal was sort of done before Obama even set foot in the White House in 2009.

00:19:54.000 That deal was sealed because it was Citigroup that circulated the memo to everybody saying, hey, here's who Obama's cabinet appointees are going to be, and Eric Holder's name is in that list.

00:20:06.000 So those things are sort of arranged in advance.

00:20:10.000 And to see a reversal later, that's a real big breach, and you're going to face the stiffest of penalties, whatever it takes to make sure it never happens again, and probably quite publicly.

00:20:23.000 At the end of the day, it's speculation about what would have happened.

00:20:27.000 Do you think that there's an economic consequence?

00:20:30.000 Can that cartel, that cartel of feds, the Fed of feds, essentially, Yes.

00:20:47.000 The guy named John Perkins has a book called Confessions of an Economic Hitman where he talks about exactly that, where basically because money is created as debt, there's no way to get any money without there being a lot of debt.

00:21:00.000 Then what happens is The debt grows and grows and grows and grows and you can't pay it back.

00:21:06.000 And then the collateral that's backing that debt gets repossessed.

00:21:10.000 And that's the ultimate sanction.

00:21:12.000 But it's a great question because it gets to something that's true of the Fed that is not true of commercial banks.

00:21:19.000 Remember, the Fed can create money out of thin air, and commercial banks can create money out of thin air, too.

00:21:26.000 But the Fed can create money. 0.99

00:21:28.000 When it creates money out of thin air, it can do so and never be called on it.

00:21:32.000 Whereas a bank lends you a million dollars, you can turn right around.

00:21:36.000 They create that money out of thin air.

00:21:38.000 Commercial bank does.

00:21:39.000 You can turn right around, though, as soon as they lend you that money and say, you know what?

00:21:43.000 I thought about it.

00:21:44.000 I want my million dollars in cash right now.

00:21:47.000 And if they can't cough up that cash, you know, you can undertake resolution proceedings and put that bank out of business.

00:21:53.000 There's no corresponding constraint on the Fed.

00:21:57.000 So the Fed ultimately, aside from the fact that it's a regulator of these banks, the Fed has the ultimate monetary power of these banks because it can create money without limitation and nobody else can.

00:22:08.000 And that's a key thing.

00:22:10.000 Yeah, I understand the power of the Fed and that kind of You know, the illusion of all that, you know, that it's creating, spinning illusions.

00:22:21.000 But what I'm wondering is, can the international cartel and basel Is there any way for them to impose pain on the United States or U.S. banks or U.S. regulators if Eric Holder had decided to go rogue and prosecute HSBC anyway to violate their little rules, their secret rules?

00:22:48.000 That's a great question.

00:22:49.000 And as far as I can tell, right now there is not.

00:22:53.000 Because, again, as far as I can tell, the Bank for International Settlements doesn't have the power to create money out of thin air.

00:23:01.000 It's an organizing organization, and I have arguments with Catherine Austin Fitz about this all the time.

00:23:06.000 I don't think that they can create money.

00:23:08.000 That may change, and that probably will change, because there's big backers, there's central bank digital currencies, that's a whole other ball of wax.

00:23:16.000 But I don't think the Fed, because the U.S. is the world reserve currency, because the Fed can issue money completely without restraint, it's kind of, right now, the ultimate power in the world.

00:23:29.000 Yeah, you could put sanctions on the Fed, you could do this and that, But until you have a global issue or money, which right now the closest thing we have is the IMF, and that's done, you know, through the special drawing rights, and that's all done by agreement, there's really no constraint on the Fed that's visible through statutes and through agreements that I can see.

00:23:54.000 I haven't been able to find one.

00:23:56.000 Not to beat a dead horse on this, but the sanction that they're threatening is contagion.

00:24:03.000 And that's the word that they keep using, that this will cause a contagion and it will cause a destabilization of the global financial markets.

00:24:13.000 What do you think that means?

00:24:17.000 Contagion means back off.

00:24:19.000 It doesn't mean what you think it means.

00:24:21.000 Tim, a guy named Neil Borofsky, who was the head of SIGSTAR, wrote a book called Bailout.

00:24:27.000 Is it will cause a contagion of criminal prosecutions in other countries?

00:24:31.000 Or is it a sort of a cascading financial issue?

00:24:42.000 It's really nothing.

00:24:43.000 It's a chicken little, a scare tactic.

00:24:46.000 You're supposed to think, hey, if this bank falls down, we get tumbling dominoes.

00:24:50.000 That's the notion you're supposed to get in the head.

00:24:53.000 Once you take down Citigroup, you're going to take down Bank of America and Goldman Sachs, and then the whole wide world is going to implode.

00:25:00.000 And that's always trotted out.

00:25:01.000 It's contagion, it's systemic risk, it's collateral consequences.

00:25:05.000 There's all these different ways and different formulations for the same thing, which ultimately are conclusions.

00:25:11.000 Systemically important and a systemic bank and all that is a conclusion that you only know whether it's true after the fact.

00:25:19.000 And so the people who are running these banks and the criminals who are running these banks, they know that.

00:25:24.000 And so they use it as a sort of a threat and as a weapon.

00:25:28.000 They've weaponized that term.

00:25:30.000 And that's what went on in the HSBC case.

00:25:32.000 Let me ask you something.

00:25:34.000 Do you get censored at all?

00:25:37.000 Not yet.

00:25:38.000 I'm going to knock on wood.

00:25:39.000 I talked to Catherine about that, but that has not happened yet.

00:25:43.000 Is that happening to Catherine?

00:25:46.000 Not that I know of.

00:25:47.000 She's still got a YouTube channel.

00:25:48.000 What I've found is that I stick pretty tightly to the facts, and I try to prove everything I say through admissions.

00:25:56.000 You know, I use my legal training.

00:25:57.000 I prove everything through admissions or through the Fed's own documents.

00:26:00.000 I don't speculate a lot.

00:26:03.000 You know, I use their own documents and their own statements and transcripts in here.

00:26:08.000 I will not inoculate you against censorship because we do the same thing and we get heavily censored, but it's the subject matter.

00:26:15.000 Catherine says it's because you use too many three-syllable words.

00:26:20.000 Maybe.

00:26:21.000 We have one two-syllable word, which is vaccine.

00:26:25.000 If you use that one, you get censored.

00:26:28.000 That's true it is.

00:26:29.000 Anyway, John, tell our listeners again where they can find you.

00:26:35.000 I am on YouTube, BitChute and Odyssey, those three different venues, all under the name Best Evidence, one word.

00:26:42.000 Or if you just type in John Titus to the search bars of those venues, you'll find me pretty quickly.

00:26:48.000 Really good to have you, John.

00:26:50.000 Thanks for the work you're doing.

00:26:51.000 Keep it up.

00:26:52.000 Thank you for having me.

RFK Jr. The Defender - September 13, 2022

Fed Immunity for Banksters with John Titus

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript